Education Groups Sit Out Test Lobbying

National testing may be the top education priority for President
Clinton, but it sure isn't for some education groups that lobby
Congress.

Mr. Clinton's proposal for voluntary student tests in 4th grade
reading and 8th grade math was still fighting for its life last week on
Capitol Hill. But few school associations have been glad-handing and
muscle-flexing in support of itaside from the Council of Chief State
School Officers, which has worked with the administration.

Kathleen Lyons, a spokeswoman for the National Education
Association, said last week that while the nea backs the president's
proposal, "it's unfair to say it's our number-one priority."

Rather, she said, opposing school vouchers and supporting
campaign-finance reform have occupied more of the energies of the 2.3
million-member union, which has been a staunch backer of Mr. Clinton
and other Democrats. That makes the national tests "a medium-level
priority for us," Ms. Lyons said.

Bronx Cheer

Meanwhile, across the Potomac River in suburban Virginia, five out
of 10 advisory committees of the American Association of School
Administrators last month gave the testing idea a Bronx cheer. Two more
panels greeted it with something betwixt love and hate. As a result,
Bruce Hunter, the chief lobbyist for the Arlington-based
superintendents' group, said last week that he was sitting this one
out. "I'm not spending any time at all on the thing," he said of Mr.
Clinton's testing plan. "It is a very low priority for us."

On top of the advisory groups' mixed reviews, the tests got a thumbs
down from an unrelated committee recommending topics for the annual
AASA convention.

"What we got was a firestorm of comment that I think reflects what
you hear around America," Mr. Hunter said.

The testing topic came up at a gathering of AASA's governing and
advisory committees on Sept. 20-21--before the Department of Education
announced it had temporarily suspended development of the tests and
before three big-city districts reversed themselves and pulled out of
the reading test. ("Riley Delays
National Tests' Development," Oct. 1, 1997.)

Then last week, Diana Lam, the superintendent of the San Antonio
district, which has many Spanish-speaking students and had originally
signed on to the testing initiative, said her district will not give
the reading test if it is offered only in English.

"People are dubious about the tests as a school improvement
measure," said Mr. Hunter of his group, which has 15,000 members. "But
nobody wants to be seen as opposing accountability" for how well
students perform. In that vein, the AASA's executive committee endorsed
the national tests on the condition that they be valid, reliable, and
cost-effective, he said.

"There's an inclination to support the thing," he said of the
testing plan, "but with the understanding that it's probably not going
to amount to much."

Notice: We recently upgraded our comments. (Learn more here.) If you are logged in as a subscriber or registered user and already have a Display Name on edweek.org, you can post comments. If you do not already have a Display Name, please create one here.

Ground Rules for Posting
We encourage lively debate, but please be respectful of others. Profanity and personal attacks are prohibited. By commenting, you are agreeing to abide by our user agreement.
All comments are public.